Reply With Quote
Avante has joined the campaign.
Damn.
ROFL no you sick . God I hope you weren't jerking off when you typed that.
LMAO hit on? Hit on? He molested them. Keep defending him though. Everyone can see you're a closet Pedo.. Again, Hastert belongs in Jail. Period. He should have never hit on the teenage athletes. Ever. I'm glad he is going to jail. I am not now and never did defend his actions.
Pedo-Defender Brigade to the rescue!!!I'm not fighting this battle again. If you weak little Betas would have let Hastert suck your that's on you, not me.
Avante has joined the campaign.
Damn.
Everyone on social media is mocking this Trump lawyer’s #SaysWho fiasco — and it’s a scream
Trump attorney Michael Cohen — until recently best known for stating that a husband can’t rape his own wife— may have jumped to the top of the list when it comes to the what was the worst possible 30 seconds by a spokesperson for the Trump campaign this election season with his “Says who” retort to questions about polls on CNN Wednesday afternoon.
With lawyerly calm and bluntness, Donald Trump’s attorney attempted to pretend that the polls showing the campaign collapsing didn’t exist by swatting away CNN host Brianna Keilar’s questions about the numbers, repeatedly saying, “Says who?”
The childish replies — reminding many of Sarah Palin’s “All of them, Katie” response to Katie Couric on which papers she reads — naturally delighted social media quipsters who were quick to point out:
“When your campaign slogan is ‘SaysWho’ your campaign is over.”
With some calling “#SaysWho” the “greatest hashtag ever,” the pile-on began for another Trump spokesperson failure day — another day wasted trying to get the campaign on track.
A sampling below:
http://www.rawstory.com/2016/08/ever...e+Raw+Story%29
Cons utional law scholar and Democrat Jonathan Turley on Wednesday said Donald Trump's proposed "extreme vetting" of Muslims entering the United States is perfectly legal and cons utional.
During an appearance on Fox News' "The Kelly File," Turley concluded Trump would be in the right to implement this sort of rule. Although it would be better to enact it with the help of Congress, he noted.
Explain the extreme vetting process Trump is proposing.
Democrat and Cons utional Expert: Trump's 'Extreme Vetting' Is Legal
Back to victim blaming by pedofattie I see.
The usual CURRENT application process takes up to TWO ING YEARS.
Xenophobe Trash will NEVER be Pres, he knows it, he doesn't want it, and he's playing you Trash supporters for fools.
Fat Bas playing the oldest trick in a beaurocrats book: That's not my department.
Fat Phuk is the governor but claims he has no knowledge.
Christie denies knowledge of settlement that reduced Trump casino debt by millions
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016...-millions.html
As for Trump? The Times reported that a Trump spokeswoman did not provide comment for the piece.
Can someone define what extreme vetting entails?
You both have it wrong. It's not just extreme vetting.
It's, extreme, extreme vetting.
CC has always been against Trump.
More trash from Trash supporters
Brewer Says Calling Clinton A 'Lying Killer' Was A 'Stumble Of The Tongue'
Former Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer (R) said on Wednesday that her comment calling Hillary Clinton a "lying killer" was just a "mispronunciation" of the Democratic nominee's name.
“I was trying to say Hillary Clinton,” Brewer told Buzzfeed News. “It was a stumble of the tongue.”
"People want a fighter. They’re tired of the lying killer, uh Hillary Clinton and Bill Clintons of the world," she said
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewir...+%28TPMNews%29
holy , the Trash supporters keep slithering, sliming deeper in the Trash dump.
Latest polls reinforce Republicans’ sense of dread
Consider the latest Quinnipiac polling, asreported by Politico yesterday afternoon:
Hillary Clinton holds double-digit leads among likely voters in Colorado and Virginia and
a narrow edge over Donald Trump in Iowa, according to a trio of battleground-state Quinnipiac University polls released Wednesday.
In the head-to-head matchups, Clinton leads Trump 49 percent to 39 percent in Colorado.
The race is closest in Iowa, where Clinton holds a 3-point lead over the Republican nominee – 47 percent to 44 percent.
But in Virginia, where Trump will campaign Saturday in Fredericksburg, Clinton leads by 12 points – 50 percent to 38 percent.
The full Quinnipiac report, including crosstabs, is online here.
Note, among all of the major pollsters, Quinnipiac has generally published results favorable to Republicans this year, making yesterday’s data that much more discouraging for the right.
http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-s...d=sm_fb_maddow
Is the Repugs' House of bags gonna tumble down?
Ahead of briefing, Trump wary of intelligence agencies
During an interview with Fox News, Trump was asked about his upcoming intelligence briefing and whether he does “trust intelligence.”
“Not so much from the people that have been doing it for our country.
Look what’s happened over the last ten years.
Look what’s happened over the years.
It’s been catastrophic,” he said in response.
“And in fact, I won’t use some of the people that are sort of your standards, you know, just use them, use them, use them.
Very easy to use them, but I won’t use them because they’ve made such bad decisions.”
At a certain level, some criticisms of the CIA, for example, are understandable. Credible critics of the intelligence community can point to real and important missteps, and no one should suggest the agencies are beyond reproach.
But let’s not miss the forest for the trees here. Donald J. Trump, if elected president, is inclined to ignore “the people that have been doing it for our country.” The “it” in that sentence refers to the collection of sensitive security information provided to American policymakers.
The next question is obvious: if the GOP candidate doesn’t want to rely on U.S. intelligence agencies, who exactly would Trump listen to when making critical security decisions?
Indeed, it shouldn’t be lost on anyone that
Trump considers Alex Jones, the National Enquirer, and Breitbart News to be credible outlets,
but the Republican nominee adopts a far more skeptical posture when it comes to the Central Intelligence Agency.
http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-s...d=sm_fb_maddow
Placing more value in crowds than polls is a recipe for failure
Fox News host Eric Bolling is sick of polls. Not only are they wrong, he said, but it’s the size of crowds at Donald Trump’s rallies that’s much more important.
“We have to stop with these polls, they’re insane,” Bolling declared on “The Five” on Wednesday (skip to 5:06 in the video above for this part). “You look at a Trump rally and there’s 12, 15,000, 10,000 people and then you look at Hillary Clinton and you have, I don’t know, 1,500, 2,000.”
Donald Trump himself expressed a similar sentiment in late June, telling conservative radio host Mike Gallagher how impressed he is with the “massive” crowds that turn out for his events.
“I walked out of one [recent event], and I said, ‘I don’t see how I’m not leading,’”
the Republican candidate said at the time.
Trump added, “We have thousands of people standing outside trying to get in, and they’re great people and they have such spirit for the country and love for the country, and I’m saying, you know,
‘Why am I not doing better in the polls?’”
The answer, of course, is that crowd size isn’t all that relevant.
But crowd size is proof of a candidate with a credible base of core supporters. When it comes to winning a national presidential race, that’s not enough. The most reliable measure of meaningful, broad support is public-opinion polling. To assume that data is wrong because it seems to contradict crowd size is to find importance in the wrong measurement.
it may be easier to believe “crowds = victory” than to accept polls showing your side trailing, but that doesn’t change the fact it’s a recipe for failure.
http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-s...d=sm_fb_maddow
Last edited by boutons_deux; 08-18-2016 at 12:29 PM.
if they want to come to the usa they can wait 2 years
if they get to the usa illegal it takes 2 years for a trial to kick them out
Nevada poll: Clinton, Trump neck-and-neck
http://www.cnn.com/2016/08/18/politi...ump/index.html
19% latino population intersting
Rasmussen Poll: Hillary Leads Trump by 2 Points
nation wide
what do you guys think about the casino thing?
if it happened as has been suggested, wouldn't that kill the idea of don being the outsider?
anyone?
Not me, CM. I'd raise my hand and go for it but I would probably just end up turning it into bbq or SAPs (sick ass pedos)
Meanwhile in Belgrade. ..
If you're skin you're not getting in
“An electoral disaster waiting to happen”: Demographics expert predicts Trump loss even “if 99 percent of white, non-college-educated men turned out to vote”
“We’re looking at a margin among college-educated white men for him that’s less than half what Romney won”
In 1980, white voters were 88 percent of the electorate. By 2012, the white vote was down to 72 percent.
While his campaign implodes, with the the third shift in campaign leadership in as many months this week, a new New York Times report outlines just how improbable a win on the back of white voters will be for Trump in 2016.
The last Republican presidential nominee, Mitt Romney, held a 27-point edge among white men to carry the male vote over all, despite losing the election to President Obama.
Romney won white men who have a college education or higher, a group that votes at a higher rate than those without college degrees, by 21 points. In one crucial swing state, Ohio, Romney won men in Ohio by seven percentage points on the strength of the white male vote and still lost the state, 48 percent to 51 percent.
According to the Times, the situation is looking even worse for Trump.
“If Mr. Trump is only doing as well or worse than Mr. Romney did with white men, he will never make up the votes he is losing among women and nonwhites,” the Times reported.
http://www.salon.com/2016/08/18/an-e...d-out-to-vote/
And The Fat Lady in Pants Suits ain't DISEASED, no matter how many times Dr. Drew, the Repugs, the right wing hate media repeat those lies and slander.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...t-hillary-cli/
Why you shouldn’t believe the right-wing conspiracy theories about Hillary Clinton’s health
http://www.rawstory.com/2016/08/why-you-shouldnt-believe-the-right-wing-conspiracy-theories-about-hillary-clintons-health/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaig n=Feed%3A+TheRawStory+%28The+Raw+Story%29
Last edited by boutons_deux; 08-18-2016 at 02:44 PM.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
